Saw a banner on CNN this morning, that the NRA is expanding their lobbying effort to embrace other conservative causes.

I, for one, question this decision. The left/Democrats are already characterizing the NRA as a branch of the Republican party. I'm not sure we won't reduce our effectiveness at lobbying for pro-2nd Amendment legislation by embracing other conservative causes and alienating some of the pro-gun Democrats that support us now.

Let's try to stick to the issue, and not devolve into an NRA-bashing thread!

__________________Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own personal safety; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths, Chief Instructor, Advanced Force Tactics, Inc. (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill)

"A clear societal change took place regarding gun ownership in the early 1990s, when the percentage of Americans saying there was a gun in their home or on their property dropped from the low to mid-50s into the low to mid-40s and remained at that level for the next 15 years. Whether this reflected a true decline in gun ownership or a cultural shift in Americans' willingness to say they had guns is unclear."

Note that those are only the people who ADMIT to owning a gun. It may well be inaccurate as all hell as a lot of people I know who own guns wouldn't admit it to some unknown third party.

__________________
"The gift which I am sending you is called a dog, and is in fact the most precious and valuable possession of mankind" -Theodorus Gaza

Definitely, a BIG mistake; just like doctors have no business knowing whether or not you own a firearm, the NRA has no business getting involved in anything that is not DIRECTLY involved in firearms freedoms.

__________________
Gun control in Canada: making the streets safer for rapists, muggers, and other violent criminals since 1936.

When you get to basis of the CNN's claim, it rests on the fact that the NRA is a member of the American Legislative Exchange Council, which is a body made up of lobbyists and state legislators. ALEC is comprised of a variety of interest groups that share resources to promote legislation at the state level.

A lobbyist hired by the NRA also worked w/ members of ALEC to promote voter ID laws at the state level. It's not apparent that she did this as a representative of the NRA. Ergo CNN is claiming that the NRA has shifted its focus to support all legislation endorsed by any member of ALEC. Their proof is that left-wing opponents of the NRA believe that the organization has a super secret rightwing agenda.

CNN lies, especially when dealing w/ hot button social issues. There really doesn't seem to be any merit to the claims in this story.

Saw a banner on CNN this morning, that the NRA is expanding their lobbying effort to embrace other conservative causes

I saw it too.

Quote:

This could be a HUGE mistake.

I agree. The NRA does not need to identify with a political party, it needs to continue to identify itself with guns and Second Amendment rights. There are many Liberal and Moderate gun owners that belong to and contribute to the NRA. More so than many want to believe. The majority of young people in this country consider themselves "Moderates". We do not need to alienate those folks, nor do folks like me want to tie up monies intended for defending our Second Amendment rights on non-firearm issues.

I am not sure how lobbying these other causes fits the NRAs purview or why they feel that resources should be taken away from the gun lobby to address other issues. I take it from this change of direction that the NRA has decided their business is more about lobbying than about firearms - nothing like remaining true to your cause.

__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011

Wow, that has got to be one of the most biased news articles I've read from a major news network, and that's saying something. Even they admit, though, "it's not known whether Mica consulted with other NRA officials about the bills on voter ID and immigration."

Basically they're taking the fact that one lobbyist that works with the NRA worked on other issues and making a conspiracy out of it.

It sounds like CNN is trying to do somekind of "guilt by association" between the NRA and ALEC to me. It's all a bunch of "with ALEC" or "ALEC and...." type of stuff. Also, they don't mention alot of specific things other than supporting a bill that requires a photo ID to vote and not just showing up with someone else's voter registration card. (Which isn't a bad thing.)

I've been an NRA member for over 50 years. It bothers me that the NRA has gotten involved in politics outside of its pro-gun charter. i have contributed many thousands of dollars to the PVF and the ILA. Stopped contributing to the ILA when they began distorting the facts and dabbling in "the UN is going to take your guns" conspiracy stuff. That puff piece about the mythological "gunowners champion" has irked me for a long time.

Politically the only thing i care about is my Second Amendment rights; everything else is secondary. i could care less that the pro-gun political candidate is a fire breathing Protestant preacher in the mold of John Brown or a lesbian Wiccan.

If the NRA ever goes full-steam conservative, my membership ends. That simple for me. I lean moderate-conservative, but I only want the NRA in gun rights. Huge mistake alienating tons of gun owners if they get political.

I feel that the NRA should stick to trying to advance firearm rights, and to educate new shooters as well as the general population about the positive aspects firearms/shooting sports/hunting. Beyond that I feel it is outside of their role. They should be trying to bring any spectrum together to support firearm rights, and not hitch up to one side, which will also alienate another side or two. We should stick together more now, and in the future, or else we will fall divided.

This move by the NRA ensures that I will never join them again. I'll all for protecting second amendment rights, but to align themselves with the conservative right on other issues is a serious mistake.

The presence of Josh Horwitz is telling. He runs the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV), an organization that collects $125,000 a year from the Joyce Foundation. Edward Welles, one of the founders of the Violence Policy Center ("let's confuse the public on the difference between machine guns and semiautomatic rifles!"), helped start the CSGV as well.

The last time I heard from them was back in October, when they ran ads claiming that HR 822 would allow people convicted of domestic violence to carry guns anywhere. Horwitz is not above hyperbole and outright lying. I'd question the merits of any statement he makes.

Many NRA lobbyists are hired guns, and they get hired because they've got a resume that includes a record of success in other areas of politics. When they're on the NRA's dime, they do the NRA's business. When they're not, they might be doing other things.

The article is an attempt to cloud that distinction, and I wouldn't give it much credence. I've heard absolutely nothing indicating that a) gun ownership is on the wane, or b) that the NRA is branching out into other areas of politics.

Believe it or not, there are many influential people within the NRA who wouldn't stand for them becoming a generic conservative, Tea Party, women should wear longer skirts in public kind of organization.

__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe

I'm not an NRA member and find it amusing that this is something new about the NRA. I just assumed this was always NRA's MO. Are you telling me NRA members don't know what their organization is all about?

A person not knowing anything about the NRA can't find its purpose by visiting its website. You hear info from current members and gun forums but what is the purpose of the NRA in the 21st century?

If the NRA ever goes full-steam conservative, my membership ends. That simple for me. I lean moderate-conservative, but I only want the NRA in gun rights. Huge mistake alienating tons of gun owners if they get political.

I agree, but I don't believe anything from CNN. I'll want verification from a reputable source.

__________________
I am not a real bullet, nor do I play one on television.

American socialism: Democrats trying to get Republicans to provide for them.

I don't support the NRA, but I find the whole thing funny. I remember a good bit of wailing and gnashing of teeth in 2010 from republicans because the NRA had endorsed some pro-gun D's over their R opponents.

If they wanted to do work in some other area like Voter ID Law, I guess I'd have to roll with it, but if they go into some other issues, any future communications will go straight to spambox.
Sounds like a fast track to losing whatever % of support they probobly get from millions of democrats.

__________________

Quote:

The uncomfortable question common to all who have had revolutionary changes imposed on them: are we now to accept what was done to us just because it was done?
Angelo Codevilla

Bear in mind that almost no media reporting is completely unbiased. CNN has never been a particular friend to the NRA or gun owners in general, so I'm inherently sceptical of any claims they make on the subject.

As to the content of the article, it's really nothing more than a guilt-by-association piece. Tara Mica is the NRA lobbyist who also worked on voter ID and immigration laws, but there is no evidence that she worked on those laws as a representative, or with any involvement at all from, the NRA.

Likewise, the article points to the NRA's opposition to the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Law. While this law, on the surface, was not about 2A, it did affect lobbying organizations which the NRA is. I don't think it's wrong, or even particularly unusual, for an organization to oppose a law which limits its own lobbying ability regardless of what that organizations main focus is.

Given the NRA's history of support for left-leaning politicians who still have good records on 2A such as Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) and former Rep. Barron Hill (D-IN), I don't really buy that they're part of some vast right-wing conspiracy.

I am more appalled at the forum members who are reacting viscerally to a headline, obviously without having read anything past that.

Sparks1957, Fishing_Cabin, and a couple others: reacting in this maner isn't normal for you, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But the meat of the article was about a lobbyist who has worked for the NRA, who has also done work for other organizations. There's no definitive tie between that lobbyist's work on non-firearms legislation and the NRA. It seems to be a CNN hatchet piece on the NRA, which is hardly surprising.

twins, you recently said you don't care about gun rights, and that if guns were restricted you'd just "find another hobby." A day or two later, you are NRA-bashing....

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.